FARM-MANAGEMENT STUDY IN ANDERSON CO., S. C. 
Table XIII. — Relation of size of farm to efficiency. 
19 
Size (acres) . 
Number 
of farms. 
Group. 
Per cent 
of return 
on invest- 
ment. 
Income 
per mule. 
Less than 15 
2 
10 
11 
6 
7 
11 
9 
13 
7 
2 
7 
4 
3 
C 
B 
A 
B 
C 
B 
A 
B 
C 
B 
A 
B 
C 
a-0.41 
.68 
4.13 
1.08 
4.32 
4.80 
6.74 
4.22 
2.43 
2.52 
6.63 
4.70 
.23 
$211 
16 to 20 
288 
21 to 25 
341 
26 to 30 
258 
31 to 35... 
311 
36 to 40 
352 
41 to 45 
412 
46 to 50... 
299 
315 
56 to 60 
239 
61 to 65 
398 
66 to 70 
457 
71 to 75 
304 
a LOSS. 
This table illustrates an application to farm-management studies 
of what is known as the law of recurring efficiency. As the size of 
the business increases (see fig. 6) a point is reached where the single 
unit of organization can be utilized most profitably. For some 
distance above this point the size does not permit the proper adjust- 
ment of the unit, and the business loses efficiency. As the size 
keeps on increasing another point is reached where two units fit in 
well, and a high point of efficiency is again reached. These high 
points, or the periods of efficiency on these farms, were on farms 
having 21 to 25, 41 to 45, and 61 to 65 acres per farm. Comparing 
these data with the most profitable acreage per work animal, it can be 
seen that these sizes are sizes for well-organized one, two, and three mule 
farms. Farms that were too large or too small for a given number of 
mules were less profitable. There were only a few farms in each of 
the groups in this table, but the influence of efficient sizes is so strong 
that a large number of farms is not required to discern the effect. 
We may now take those farms having the more favorable sizes, 
namely, those of 21 to 25, 41 to 45, and 61 to 65 acres, and compare 
them still further with those having less favorable sizes. In Table 
XIII the groups of farms are labeled A, B, and C, as an indication 
of the f avorableness of size, the A groups having the most favorable 
and C the least favorable size. By combining all the A groups into 
one, the B groups into another, and the C groups into a third, the 
effect of the favorableness of size can be clearly seen. The farm in- 
come, the labor income, the per cent return on the investment, and 
the income per mule (see Table XIV) are all highest on the farms 
having the more favorable sizes. In the A groups the farm income is 
48 per cent higher than, and the per cent return on the investment 
more than double, that in the C groups. 
